The proposed construction of the Suhua Freeway has stoked a fierce debate between President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), the four Democratic Progressive Party presidential aspirants and environmental groups. Earth Day last Sunday made this issue all the more relevant, and the fate of the project will have a significant impact on the state of environmental protection in this country.
It is the government's responsibility to encourage industrial investment, boost employment, facilitate development of the transportation system and ensure people have access to utilities. However, Taiwan has in recent years been torn between prioritizing large-scale development projects and protecting the environment.
Construction proposals like the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, the Meinung Reservoir in Kaohsiung County and the Taipei-Ilan Freeway have caused heated debate. And yet, a broadly accepted arbitration mechanism for disputes has never been established. This is why similar controversies come with every proposed national development project, and this is a serious waste of resources. It also engenders distrust between the government and the public.
Government regulations stipulate that major construction projects should first be assessed for their environmental impact before work can begin. These rules seem to address the prerequisite that both construction interests and environmental protection are considered. Unfortunately, given that the independence of the environmental assessments has never been respected, it is common to hear complaints of political interference.
For example, the Suhua Freeway proposal seemed like a perfect idea to the government. It would help expand the national freeway system and guarantee the right to convenient transportation for citizens in the eastern part of the country. Some influential individuals, however, strongly opposed the plan because of its potential ecological damage to one of the country's last remaining undeveloped areas. They said the freeway would cause irreversible damage to the ecology in the area, even before the tourists it was meant to attract would have a chance to see it.
Discussing and setting public policy is not a black-and-white issue. Instead, there should be various proposals to choose from that cover different routes, construction techniques, building time limits, engineering budgets and environmental impacts. The road construction departments should be responsible for proposing a variety of options, the environmental impact assessment committee should evaluate each of their merits, the government should estimate the budget, and the public response and practical requirements should all be taken into consideration. The agencies assigned to each part of the chain should complement the others by being professional and independent.
But with the government accused of already having made its mind up on the matter and trying to interfere in the environmental review, this crucial balance has been upset.
Although the government made plans for the highway with the best of intentions, it has already sparked a controversy. It should respect the expert decision of the environmental review committee. If the highway doesn't pass, it shouldn't be built. If it does, the government should explain the merits and flaws of the different plans to the public. If the controversy continues unabated, the government could also take advantage of the year-end legislative elections to put the question to the public in a referendum.
Taiwan's environment belongs to all of its citizens and all of them should have a say.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry